But he is still guilty.Color me surprised...or not. She ruined this case, absolutely bungled it. I wonder if IE alerted the ARC or if they unilaterally decided to investigate Linda?
But he is still guilty.Color me surprised...or not. She ruined this case, absolutely bungled it. I wonder if IE alerted the ARC or if they unilaterally decided to investigate Linda?
He was definitely someone who popped into my head as a possible source for the unknown complaint against Stanley. The timing of him abruptly leaving right after the preliminary hearing was odd to say the least. But there are lots of possibilities.I guess we know now why Jeff Lindsay jumped ship. MOO.
That is the problem - high stakes and a person who isn’t up to their job.But he is still guilty.
I bet he has a story to tell.He was definitely someone who popped into my head as a possible source for the unknown complaint against Stanley. The timing of him abruptly leaving right after the preliminary hearing was odd to say the least. But there are lots of possibilities.
From the article (bolding by me) :
In a statement, the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel told 9NEWS, "I can confirm that our office is investigating Linda Stanley based on allegations that have become publicly known." …The office does not elaborate on the parameters or details of active investigations.
While we don’t know what the investigation centers around, Eytan said she provided information about the Morphew case in particular.
So, I guess its entirely possible IMO that Eytan is the party making the investigation publicaly known. Would that shock anyone ? Also since we have no idea what the investigation centers around per 9NEWS, they certainly spent the better part of their article reporting on Eytan rehashing all her" greatet hits" regarding the wrong doings of Stanley and the prosecution for the Morphew case. It makes it seem like the investigation of LS centers around the Morphew case when in reality no one really knows what the investigation is about.
Also Eytan says she did not file the complaint? How am I to believe anything that woman says after following this case all this time IMO- maybe she did maybe she didn't. Maybe somebody else from her office filed it or not.
Eytan says she provided information about the Morphew case in particular. Eytan does not say she was asked any questions about the Morphew case, just that she provided info on the case.
Whether, whatever LS is being investigated for is real or not is up to the ARC to decide. I have no idea. But IMO IE is up to her usual hijunks and innuendo.
Just all my opinion
He was definitely someone who popped into my head as a possible source for the unknown complaint against Stanley. The timing of him abruptly leaving right after the preliminary hearing was odd to say the least. But there are lots of possibilities.
MOO The first PC hearing was a disaster of lack of preparation.I was never sure if her competency issues were blown out of proportion by Barry’s supporters or if she did, in fact, have competency issues. There always seemed to be a lot of drama and missteps, but I haven’t followed many cases and I don’t know what is the “normal” expected level of drama. Or maybe you’re right and it‘s political in nature.
Actually, if you google Linda Stanley and see the claims made about her (past client/case handling and in particular, the claims made by LS during her run to be appointed DA), I would imagine, that seeing as these are in the public domain, that gave the Office of Attorney Regulation grounds for investigation. I am not sure if Attorney Regulation in the US is the same or similar to that of the UK, but dishonesty/telling fibs/making misleading claims is/are grounds for permanent disbarrment (removal from the Roll) in the UK. I would hope that similar would apply in the US.From the article (bolding by me) :
In a statement, the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel told 9NEWS, "I can confirm that our office is investigating Linda Stanley based on allegations that have become publicly known." …The office does not elaborate on the parameters or details of active investigations.
While we don’t know what the investigation centers around, Eytan said she provided information about the Morphew case in particular.
So, I guess its entirely possible IMO that Eytan is the party making the investigation publicaly known. Would that shock anyone ? Also since we have no idea what the investigation centers around per 9NEWS, they certainly spent the better part of their article reporting on Eytan rehashing all her" greatet hits" regarding the wrong doings of Stanley and the prosecution for the Morphew case. It makes it seem like the investigation of LS centers around the Morphew case when in reality no one really knows what the investigation is about.
Also Eytan says she did not file the complaint? How am I to believe anything that woman says after following this case all this time IMO- maybe she did maybe she didn't. Maybe somebody else from her office filed it or not.
Eytan says she provided information about the Morphew case in particular. Eytan does not say she was asked any questions about the Morphew case, just that she provided info on the case.
Whether, whatever LS is being investigated for is real or not is up to the ARC to decide. I have no idea. But IMO IE is up to her usual hijunks and innuendo.
Just all my opinion
It’s very sad that justice for Suzanne has been so difficult to achieve. I continue to hope that re-prosecution is possible but I’m not sure how that would work. Can Stanley still retry a case now that she’s under investigation? Could a re-opening happen only if Stanley is cleared in the investigation or if she is separated from her job and another interim DA is appointed?Am I the only one that feels like it's sad as heck that concern for justice for Suzanne is being completely lost among all this other junk going on?
I continue to hope that a special prosecutor can be hired for this case.It’s very sad that justice for Suzanne has been so difficult to achieve. I continue to hope that re-prosecution is possible but I’m not sure how that would work. Can Stanley still retry a case now that she’s under investigation? Could a re-opening happen only if Stanley is cleared in the investigation or if she is separated from her job and another interim DA is appointed?
Totally agree @Ontario Mom. Once again IE has teamed up with the press and made a major push to influence the narrative! IMOAm I the only one that feels like it's sad as heck that concern for justice for Suzanne is being completely lost among all this other junk going on?
All cases should be of concern if this prosecutor is failing in her job.Am I the only one that feels like it's sad as heck that concern for justice for Suzanne is being completely lost among all this other junk going on?
The poorly written AA containing inadmissable info and unverifiable information should have been a portend of things to come. I suspect that Judge Murphy thought the preliminary would sort out the facts from the speculation but the case just kept limping along. Is it salvageable? Maybe but I don’t think we even know the actual facts yet.I continue to hope that a special prosecutor can be hired for this case.
I don't know LS or even much about her, but she has proven to be a very polarizing figure imo. None of us know what went on behind the scenes during the Morphew case. Linda was head of the case so ultimatley the blame does lie with her but I think there is more than enough blame to go around. I guess my assessment of her was she was over her head on this case, like many small town DA's would be and did not know what she did not know. If she did not, she should have asked for some help from some big guns. In my mind the general weakness of the prosecution, along with their lack of preparation and attention to detail, was their inability to understand how to be agressive enough and control the narrative.
I do think the LS "taint" is so bad, that for LS to retry this case under her leadership, would be a huge mistake.
I agree that it's almost like there are those that are not concerned with justice for Suzanne. Seemingly they are so blinded by their distaste for LS that they just want to take her down. You can sense the "chum" in the water IMO. Even on these threads.
When I think of all of IE misrepresentations, fibs etc over the course of this case, and there have been MANY, including in her most recent court appearance, it seems maybe somebody should drop a dime on her. Just my thoughts.
I continue to hope that a special prosecutor can be hired for this case.
I don't know LS or even much about her, but she has proven to be a very polarizing figure imo. None of us know what went on behind the scenes during the Morphew case. Linda was head of the case so ultimatley the blame does lie with her but I think there is more than enough blame to go around. I guess my assessment of her was she was over her head on this case, like many small town DA's would be and did not know what she did not know. If she did not, she should have asked for some help from some big guns. In my mind the general weakness of the prosecution, along with their lack of preparation and attention to detail, was their inability to understand how to be agressive enough and control the narrative.
I do think the LS "taint" is so bad, that for LS to retry this case under her leadership, would be a huge mistake.
I agree that it's almost like there are those that are not concerned with justice for Suzanne. Seemingly they are so blinded by their distaste for LS that they just want to take her down. You can sense the "chum" in the water IMO. Even on these threads.
When I think of all of IE misrepresentations, fibs etc over the course of this case, and there have been MANY, including in her most recent court appearance, it seems maybe somebody should drop a dime on her. Just my thoughts.
Actually, if you google Linda Stanley and see the claims made about her (past client/case handling and in particular, the claims made by LS during her run to be appointed DA), I would imagine, that seeing as these are in the public domain, that gave the Office of Attorney Regulation grounds for investigation. I am not sure if Attorney Regulation in the US is the same or similar to that of the UK, but dishonesty/telling fibs/making misleading claims is/are grounds for permanent disbarrment (removal from the Roll) in the UK. I would hope that similar would apply in the US.
Letter to the Editor: Yes, we need a DA with integrity - by Community Contributor - Ark Valley Voice
Dear Editor: If I said that I was a police officer for several years and I learned my values, including honesty, from my father who was a farmer and aarkvalleyvoice.com
District Attorney Linda Stanley’s license suspended
“The Court does find this pattern to be negligent, bordering on, reckless.”District Judge Ramsey Lama On Wednesday, June 1 after the Tribune went to print, the Colorado Supreme Court su…wetmountaintribune.com
The statement issued by the Office of Attorney Regulation Counsel confirms an investigation of LS based on "... allegations that have become publicly known." I don't know of any public allegations sufficient to implicate the rules of professional responsibility, other than BM's claims (made through IE) about discovery violations in his case.From the article:
"Eytan has spoken out against Stanley for months, arguing that her client was wrongly charged. She said the ARC interviewed her on Friday in connection with the investigation into Stanley. Eytan said she did not file the complaint that is currently being investigated but plans to file a separate one."
It sounds like this investigation isn't based on IE's complaint since she hasn't filed it yet. So either someone else filed a complaint, or ARC initiated the investigation themselves (not sure if they do that though).